Monday, September 17, 2012

How to Be Impolite

We're told there are two things we should never bring up in polite conversation: religion and politics.

You think the reason is obvious, and that's because it is. People get mad when they talk about those things. "Polite conversation" can't hold up for very long when someone gets compared to Hitler, or accuses someone else of moral relativism and bestiality. Feelings get hurt. Judgements fly. Friendships end.

Why is this? Why do people get so angry and offensive when they talk about this stuff? It's actually a pretty simple formula.

Person A is passionate about Thing X
Person B is passionate about Thing X
Person A and Person B completely disagree about Thing X

X can be anything. The degree to which Person A and Person B will become angry with one another directly correlates with the degree to which they are passionate about the same subject. That is why plugging "politics" into the Thing X variable will almost inevitably start a fire.

This is discouraging, because a conversation in which two people agree with each other about everything won't result in much progress for either of them. No one learns anything unless there are differences of perspective. The paradox is obvious. When people disagree about politics, they get mad at each other, and so, still, no one learns anything.

There are two overwhelmingly common assumptions we tend to make about people who deeply disagree with us about some political point: they are stupid, or they are evil. The "right" tends to get characterized by the former, and the "left" by the latter, but they accuse each other of being both as often as possible. The consequence of this sort of judgement is immediate and devastating. If you've deemed your opponent as either stupid or evil, or both, you will not be motivated to see things from their point of view. Conversely, if you yourself are accused of being either or both of those things, you'll probably respond poorly, and why shouldn't you? After all, it's offensive to be misjudged. You are, in your view, rightfully offended.

How did it get this way? We can blame the media, in part. Our newspapers and network news channels and political commentators have to make a living. People don't pay much attention to dispassionate conversations. The news outlets are all in a desperate struggle to get us to pay attention to things. They compete with each other, and they compete with a multitude of more interesting stimuli. So, they'll do what they do.

But what they do would not work if we weren't already predisposed to regarding those who disagree with us as enemies, and then cramming them into caricatures of themselves. We like to get angry about the things we care most about. It feels good. You might be tempted to think this isn't necessarily true, but turn an emotional mirror on yourself. Take in your mind a subject that matters to you, and one that you've studied to some depth. Now imagine that someone, every day, tells you that you are wrong about it. First of all, you know you're right--being challenged has only made you more certain of it. Second, what does this person even know? After a few days or weeks or years, you would probably feel tempted, eventually, to tell this person exactly what you think, and why he or she is wrong. Imagine how good that would feel.

You probably don't have to imagine it. Most of us have felt it, that satisfaction of cutting down someone's stupid ideas. You know what's even better? Calling someone out who has more sinister intentions, like lining his pockets, or acquiring more power. Those people deserve whatever happens to them. If not for people like them, we wouldn't be in this pile of crap! So let's make them eat it.

If you've engaged yourself in the conversation of politics, if you've begun to form your own opinions about that frustrating, undeniably important subject of statecraft, then you've felt those things. And they have done harm.

I am only one person, and you are only one person, but there really is no hope at all unless you, and I, and people like us, decide we are capable of taking a step back, for just a moment, to consider how we might elevate the way we talk about these things.

There are principles that will help us, little by little, rise above the ugly fray of modern partisanship. They are not complicated, but they take time, and they take a lot of effort. Insofar as you understand their importance, however, you become obligated to do your best to live by them.

  1. Be careful about knowing things. This isn't about throwing your hands up in the air with a "Who knows?" sigh; it's about keeping an open mind. This is almost, but not quite, impossible. You know it is because a lot of people claim to be keeping an open mind when it's clear to everyone around them that they are eternally convinced of their own rectitude. Take a hard look at yourself before you dismiss the possibility that you're that guy.
  2. Assume people have good intentions. Guess what? Most of the people you will ever talk to about politics are patriots. They love their country, and they want to see it and the people who live in it succeed. They're not just saying that, they really feel that way, just like you do. Also, everyone "cares about people." Don't ever default, in explaining your position on some particular issue, on this response: "Well, I just care about people." Because the inevitable implication is that the person to whom you are responding doesn't give a crap about people, which is stupid.
  3. Actually try to understand people who disagree with you. Don't just say you're trying to understand, actually do it. It's really hard. You have to shut up. You have to ask questions and listen to the answers. And you have to work to put yourself in the other person's shoes and try to see things from his or her angle. The magic of this is that as you do, he or she will be much more inclined to reciprocate. 
  4. Never, ever, ever attack people. Attacking someone is purely selfish. It accomplishes nothing except to make you feel good and the other person feel bad. When you attack someone, you almost guarantee that they will never agree with you or see your side of things. You become their enemy, at least when it comes to the subject upon which the attack was based. 
  5. If you get mad, shut up. The best thing you can do if you feel yourself starting to get angry is to stop talking and get out of the conversation in the most amiable way possible. Perhaps you can still your fury without walking away, but most people can't. Which leads to...
  6. If they get mad, shut up. Arguing with an angry person is pointless. It's an absolute, destructive waste of time and energy. 
Did I mention that these are really, really hard? As you read each of them--HA!--as I wrote each of them, I called to mind instances in my own life when I failed to follow the suggestion because the temptation to take the lower road was overwhelming. Or, more often, because it didn't even occur to me at the time. 

But we are agentive human beings. We can decide to improve ourselves. We can try and fail and try again and do a little better. And we have to, because as dismal and soul-sucking as politics are, they are preeminently important. We should talk about this stuff. It matters to everyone. But we can do better.

*****

As always, feel free to leave whatever thoughts you have in the comments. Specifically, for this post, are there any principles of good political conversation that you abide by (or try to) that didn't make it onto my list? 

5 comments:

  1. I'm going to forward this to everyone I know.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jordan, your timing is impeccable; I've been having a "can't every thinking person see that they're stupid and/or evil?" evening. Time to turn off the pundits and revel in the refreshing cascade of your illuminating suggestions. Easier said than done, to be sure, but worth trying. I'll let you know how it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Update: After certain events this week, I'm going to backpedal a bit. I'm persuaded that "stupid" and "evil" do exist from time to time. They just do. We might attempt to soften the effect by downgrading the terms to "uninformed" and "self-interested," but sometimes it just is what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Guidance on how to interact with those whose opinions differ from our own can be found in Judge Thomas B. Griffin's September 18, 2012, forum address at Brigham Young University.
    [Quoting Peter Wayner:] "Civility has to do with the respect we owe others as fellow human beings. It is both an animating spirit and a mode of discourse. It establishes limits so we don't treat opponents as enemies, and it helps inoculate us against one of the unrelenting temptations in politics and in life more generally, which is to demonize and dehumanize those who hold views different from our own. Civility . . . advances righteous arguments for a simple reason: it forecloses ad hominem attack, which is the refuge of sloppy, undisciplined minds."

    ReplyDelete
  5. We like to pressure people into agreeing with us. When that doesn't work, we simply hold up a hand and say "Talk to the hand cuz the face ain't home, homie."
    Great post, though! Thoroughly enjoyed reading your insights about touchy topics. :) Your optimism on the topic was appreciated.

    ReplyDelete